Tuesday, 31 March 2009

The traditional view of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is that it was created to make Europe self-sufficient in food production and to ensure that smaller farmers were able to make a living. By the early 1970s, the CAP had more than achieved the self-sufficiency target. Farmers, encouraged by massive amounts of taxpayers’ money, were producing far more than EU citizens could eat or drink. Naturally, they chose to grow whatever attracted the largest subsidies, regardless of whether there was a genuine market for what they produced.

A new book, ‘The Great European Rip-Off’, by David Craig and Matthew Elliot and sub-headed ‘How the Corrupt, Wasteful EU is Taking Control of our Lives’, published by Random House has an excellent section where it exposes the history of the CAP and also shows how it is now disastrously failing all but the richest farmers and lining the pockets of many who have little to do with farming.

The book makes it clear that Brussels , in coming up with the CAP, had in fact created a monster, which rapidly grew out of control. In the 1970s, there were beef and butter mountains and a huge 17.8 billion litre lake of extremely poor quality wine. The taxpayer, having shelled out for this over production also ended up paying for most of it to be stored, reprocessed and frequently destroyed. All of this was happening against a backdrop of a billion people in the Third World starving, with about 9 million dying of hunger and malnutrition each year. Not a pretty picture.

The book goes as far as to suggest that had Britain and Denmark not joined in 1973, the hugely expensive over-production generated by the CAP would have bankrupted the then European Economic Community. We now call it the EU. The generous new contributions from taxpayers in these two countries kept the whole thing going and have helped to create the strange situation that we find ourselves in today, where the CAP has become terribly distorted and diverted from its original purpose.

The EU frequently claims that the CAP is a key ingredient in maintaining the EU economy and sustaining a sector that is responsible for 19 million jobs. Among the key benefits the EU claims for CAP is that it ‘spends the money where it is most needed,’ but does it? Traditionally, French farmers are supposed to be the biggest beneficiaries of CAP largesse, although only 10% of EU farmers are located in France . The CAP ensures that they receive 25% of all CAP money. 130,000 French farmers each receive £18,400 per annum. This compares with around 120,000 farmers in the UK , Germany and Spain combined, receiving this level of subsidy. There are also 3,000 French farmers receiving annual subsidies of £91,940.

Indeed, looking at where most of the CAP money is spent, the suggestion that it is being spent ‘where it is most needed’, becomes highly questionable. 85% of the budget (£55.3 billion) goes to just 18% of farms and the most wealthy 2% of farmers and agricultural companies receive no less than a quarter of the total budget. The identity of the recipients tends to be shrouded in secrecy and one Scottish newspaper battled for more than two years to identity CAP subsidy recipients in Scotland . They eventually discovered that the country’s largest farmers were receiving an average of £230,000 a year, while the average subsidy for all farmers in Scotland was a mere £9,000.

Two large food companies in Sweden and Denmark , hardly the most needy of recipients, have been given a combined total of £1.37 billion since 2000. Another major company, Campina operating in Germany , Holland and Belgium has had almost £920 million. Nestle, which operates in Britain , Austria , Denmark , Spain and Holland has received hundreds of millions. Even closer to home, Tate & Lyle is one of Britain ’s largest CAP recipients at £100 million a year.

Landowners who don’t actually do any farming have a hand in the pot and even airlines and cruise ship companies are getting hand-outs as they are allowed to claim because they are exporting food! Think of that next time you tuck into an airline bread roll! However, altogether the most disturbing of the decidedly odd list of CAP beneficiaries is the four French banks, based in the poshest areas of Paris . The BNP, Credit Mutual, Credit Agricole and Banque Populaire have each received over £91.9 million for supporting French agriculture largely through loans to farmers. There are vast sums also given to members of the Royal families of a number of European countries including our own.

When you consider that the average subsidy given to farmers in the EU is probably as low as £8,000 a year, you have to question the whole purpose of the CAP. The problem is that whenever suggestions are made about reducing subsidies, enraged farmers take to the streets to protest, little realising that they are protecting the interests of a lot of very wealthy people. The EU has promised to publish details of CAP recipients this month (April). It will be interesting to see if they keep this promise and if there is any reaction from our normally supine media when they see how the CAP is making the rich richer.

Monday, 30 March 2009

Stuart Wheeler is one of those rarities in political circles - someone who puts principles before party.

While his donation to UKIP and subsequent expulsion from the Tories is great news for UKIP supporters and eurosceptics in general, it has to be remembered that he has been stabbed in the back by the party that he's supported so generously for so many years.

What Wheeler needs now is messages of support, not just from UKIP supporters, but from Tories as well. Send us your messages of support and we'll forward them on all together.

A by-election is to be held on May 7th for the Council Seat left vacant following the sad death of Rossmere Councillor Michael Johnson in February. Mick and Dave were opposed politically but they conducted their opposition without personal animosity. They often ‘crossed swords’ during campaigns and debate was always ‘lively’. RIP Mick.

Vote For Dave Pascoe In Rossmere Ward!

Dave lives in Rossmere Ward and has fought this seat four times in the past, each time coming closer to winning with an increased vote every time. In 2008 Dave broke through into second place when the Liberal Democrat vote collapsed.

Only UKIP is a credible alternative to Labour in Rossmere Ward. Tories or Lib-Dems can’t win in Rossmere and Labour will be lining up one of their Party Faithful who will expect to take the seat by right. I hope the residents of Rossmere don’t allow themselves to be taken for granted!

UKIP wanted the election to be held on June 4th since this would have reduced the costs of holding the election as it would have been on the same day as the European Parliament Elections. However, the current politicians don’t care about how much of your money they waste and they have decided that saving money isn’t important.

Dave will be sending detailed proposals during the campaign but if you would like to know more, display a UKIP poster, or help with the campaign then Dave is always available.I know he would invite you in for a cup of tea but that’s illegal during a campaign! Politicians can promise you the earth but they can’t give you a cup of tea!

If you can help in the By-election please telephone Dave Pascoe on 223754 or e-mail him at d.j.pascoe@btinternet.com.

The EU is threatening to take away our iPods, MP3s, mobile phones and for that matter, all devices which can store and play music.

The EU supports the ACTA Treaty. This treaty claims to be about protecting intellectual property, cracking down on piracy and preventing copyright theft. No one objects to sensible measures in this regard. However, ACTA is not about sensible legal protection.

ACTA is principally about spying on people. After all, you can’t be arrested for downloading files from the internet unless the state knows what you are up to on the internet in the first place. Under terms of the ACTA Treaty, the government will be able to spy on your internet behaviour, and seize your iPod. Secondly, it is about arresting and fining them.

The scary thing is how easy it will be to fall foul of ACTA and thus lose your iPod, get fined or even jailed.

Finally, any TV shows on your iPod may be illegal in other EU countries. Any shows with jokes about gender, race or religion could get you sent to another EU country and punished there. The EU Arrest Warrant makes this a possibility.

The Conservatives, Lib Dems, Labour and Green Party all support the EU, and thus cannot oppose the EU’s control over this treaty. Only UKIP opposes it.

Saturday, 28 March 2009

Eighteen people turned up in Leominster today to hand out leaflets in the pouring rain and vicious hail storms.

The LibLabCon might have more members than UKIP, they might have more MPs, MEPs and councillors, but how many of their members would you have seen out in rain and hail storms putting leaflets through doors?

Stuart Wheeler, the multi-millionaire who has donated millions to the Tories, has defected to UKIP.

When David Camoron reappointed arch-eurofederalist Ken Clarke to his shadow cabinet, he managed to not only irritate vast swathes of the Tory membership but also Stuart Wheeler, their biggest donor.

Wheeler warned Camoron that he wasn't happy and they needed to buck up on their eurosceptic credentials or he was walking.

According to Wheeler, Camoron had a meeting with 70 Tory MPs and told them the European Empire isn't an issue and this was the straw that broke the camel's back. Wheeler has defected to UKIP and written a cheque for £100k to the party.

Wheeler said:

The public know that the EU is incompetent, ineffective, hidebound and riven with fraud but the current political class in Westminster don't want to talk about it. I believe that millions of people want a say on the matter, and by voting UKIP they can be heard.

The LibLabCon have telling the media at every opportunity that UKIP has collapsed and that the party is going nowhere. One thing you can be sure of is that self-made millionaires don't get to be millionaires by backing losers.

Update:Iain Dale isn't bovvered. Honest. Face? Bovvered?Stuart Wheeler has "committed an act of gross disloyalty" apparently. But not Camoron when he knowingly appointed Ken Clarke in the knowledge that it would mean losing their biggest donor.

Right, a holiday, travel and hotel accomodation website has been set up to raise funds for UKIP, delegates to last years conference in Bournemouth were given details and further details are about to be announced in the imminent issue of the Independence magazine.

Basically if you, relatives or friends are travelling anywhere and require flights, train travel, package holidays, insurance, hotel rooms we have linked up with most of the major travel and accomodation firms in the country and by clicking on the banner adverts in the relevent sections on the site you will be taken straight through to the normal sites operated by these firms. By making your booking by going through our links to the sites you would have used anyway, the firms involved will know by tracking that the booking has come via our UKIP site and will pay us a % commission of your total spend which will be distributed to branches and YI.

So to summarise, if you are going anywhere or booking a holiday please check out our site and if what you want is on our pages you will raise money for UKIP at no extra cost to yourself simply by using the same sites that you would have used anyway.

Please spread the word and use the site yourselves where possible. The site address is :- www.holidayclubuk.com

Friday, 27 March 2009

This is a critical year for the UK Independence Party and we need Young Independence and the rest of the party to be at the top of its game if we are going to succeed. The ‘old’ parties are talking the same language and we have a fantastic opportunity to ‘strike a chord‘ with the British public and break the political mould once again. In 2004 we had 12 MEPs elected and beat the Lib Dems into fourth place. We did it in 2004 and we can do it in 2009!

Please don’t be fooled into thinking it is going to be easy, because it is not. We will need armies of leafleters out there, on doorsteps and spreading the word: we will require letter writers, public speakers and bags of enthusiasm, which I know many of you have in abundance. We now need to transfer your enthusiasm for the cause on to others and I believe this will happen in the coming months.

At the moment Europe is not a topic, which interests many people, but in the run-up to the European Election this will all change. Europe and the nature of the European Union will be out there; it will be a ‘hot topic’ that will be discussed on the University campuses and in the workplace and Young Independence will have to play a vital role if we are capitalise on this growing interest. So, if you are at University, spread our message across your campus; or if you are at work, tell your colleagues about what UKIP has to offer. I think you will find that the vast majority of people agree with what we say; we just have to say it!

You will also be helped by the fact that the UK Independence Party’s media profile will increase as we near the European Election. Nigel Farage and other MEP candidates will regularly be on television and in the newspapers. The media will want to know both what we stand for and how we intend to implement our policies. UKIP will be very much in the ‘public eye’ and hopefully on the ‘tip of everyone’s tongue’, just as it was in 2004.

I can also promise you that this year’s campaign will be the most professional that UKIP has ever run. There is a new Central Campaign Office in Westminster and there will be a real emphasis on ‘new media,’ which I have to admit, goes way over myhead! The team is in place, the candidates are selected and we are ‘up for it’ and ready to go.

We have a great opportunity this year my friends and we cannot allow it to ‘slip through our fingers.’ We have the right message, the right team and the right goal. What we now need is your enthusiasm and commitment because this is our campaign, this is our cause and this is our time. Get out there and let’s make 2009 the year when the political landscape changed forever. Get involved/join UKIP NOW

As you will be aware we have planned a Table top day in the Centre of Sunderland for Sat 28th March, sadly, due to bad weather this will not be practical.

If any supporters are keen to assist us this weekend then I would like to suggest that you consider a little leafleting in your own area.If you wish to participate in this activity then please let me know by return with the following details;

Number of leaflets required.Name and address fore leaflets to be delivered.

Providing I have this information before the end of this day (Midnight), I shall ensure they are delivered to your door first thing in the morning.

Please be sure to keep a note of the area that you actually deliver to.

If there are any local members in our local area, Stockton, that would consider leafleting in Inglby Barwich this Sunday, in preparation for a By-Election then please contact me on the above number.

I have made provisional plans to have a table and leaflet give out in Sunderland City Centre on the following Saturday 4th April, so please make a note in your diary for this day, details will be sent out mid week.

Thursday, 26 March 2009

Brian Seymour has developed a roof rack-based UKIP advertising board that should fit most two bar roof racks.

The advertising boards cost £26 for a pair and postage is £10. The boards are being sold at cost price. If you don't have a roof rack, Brian has managed to secure a 20% discount from Halfords for anyone buying a set of the advertising boards.

The UK Independence Party has chosen Bob Edwards to be their prospective Parliamentary Candidate for the new Central Devon Constituency at the next General Election. Bob, 63, is a former Royal Marines officer, District Councillor and five-times Mayor of Crediton.

In the 2001 General Election he stood in West Devon; four years later he stood in Tiverton and Honiton. Both times he increased UKIP’s vote by a considerable margin.

He says: “Britain has spent hundreds of years struggling to become a self-governing democracy, only for the 3 traditional Parties to throw it all away in the last 40 years. Already over 70% of the laws and (often petty) directives governing you emanate from Brussels – usually drawn up by people you do not elect and cannot remove. Little wonder that many of you no longer bother to vote.

UKIP will return full self-government to Westminster, cooperating with the EU only on matters of mutual concern.Far from isolating Britain, this will enable us to rejoin the rest of the world, which is where we traditionally belong, and where our best hope for a satisfying and prosperous future lies. It must be clear to most people that our 36-year membership of the EEC/EU has been far from an unalloyed success.

Because the EU seeps into EVERY aspect of our lives, this must be the most important issue at the next election. In my opinion, a vote for any of the traditional Parties will be a vote wasted, because all of them, ALL of them, are happy to have many of the decisions which affect all of us to be decided in Brussels.

Wednesday, 25 March 2009

UKIP Hartlepool counillors have joined the partys nationwide campaign aimed at highlighting the plight of British pubs.Steve Allison and Martyn Aiken handed over 1,000 beer mats to the landlady at the Owton Lodge pub, in Stockton Road in Hartlepool.

The beer mats are part of UKIPs nationwide campaign to highlight the effect the smoking ban has had on pubs.UKIP wants to see landlords given the power to decide whether to allow separate smoking rooms on their premises. They are also calling for the tax on real ales to be cut to support traditional beers.

Coun Allison, of the St Hilda ward, said: "UKIP believes pubs know their own customer base better than 'the man from Whitehall.' It should be the landlords who decide if their pub is non smoking or not and if they want a designated smoking room they should be allowed to have one as long as it is correctly signposted and the staff don't mind.

"Depending on what figures you read there are four or five pubs going out of business every day because of overtaxing and over zealous health and safety laws. That is a great shame because pubs are great social venues and surely it is better to have people drinking in a controlled environment like a pub.

"The punitive level of taxation on beer and spirits in pubs also reduces sales volume and hence revenue, forcing many pubs out of business."

Landlady June Hollifield, who has been at the Owton Lodge for five years, said: "I think it is a fantastic idea and anything that supports British pubs should be celebrated. "I was given 1,000 beer mats and they will be placed around the pub."

Gordon Parkin, UKIP's lead candidate for the European Parliament elections in June, was also present at the North East launch. Mean while the Vale of Glamorgan UKIP branch have got thousands of beermats out in over 20 pubs the landlords there actually gathered all their existing mats in straight away to replace them with UKIP ones.

''Three of the pub landlords have already got 'Vote UKIP' posters up inside their premises after requesting them off us'' We literally can't get enough of the mats to satisfy demand. Local branch chairman Kevin Mahoney told us.

Else where UKIP Bradford have also been busy and even managed to cause quite a stir in one of the pubs. If you havnt already signed the petition you can do here

THERE'S a new party in Fylde.The Fylde Branch of UKIP will officially launch on Friday Night in St Annes.

It will be the first time that the party, which is committed to withdrawing Britain from the European Union, has been active in the Borough. UKIP are inviting Members and non-members alike to the inaugural meeting to get a flavour of what the party stands for. And they will unveil their first two election candidates - 63-year-old local campaigner Bill Whitehead and his son Richard, 24.

The father and son team, who live on St Andrew's Road South, will contest the St Annes North and South seats at the upcoming County Council elections in June.Bill, who was active in the Save St Annes Swimming Baths campaign, said: "We are sick of the way things are being run and decided it was time to do something.

"Our main belief is that we shouldn't be a part of the European union, which is so costly and tells us all what to do, when the money could be spent on British citizens." Also at the meeting will be UKIP MEP Dr John Whittaker and Regional Organiser Dr Fred McGlade, who will provide an update on the progress of the European and County Council campaigns.

Questions will be invited and welcomed at the meeting, something which Bill says will be at the heart of their manifesto. "We want to get back to the old way of doing things, where people were actually listened to. We believe a lot of people in the community are fed up with the Conservatives and will listen to what we have to say. The most important thing is just to get people involved."

The move makes UKIP the second party this year to mount to challenge Fylde Tory supremacy.The meeting will take place on March 27 at St Margaret's Church Hall, St Leonard's Road West, at 7.30pm.

Tuesday, 24 March 2009

The launch of the Green Paper by the Secretary of State for Justice, Jack Straw and his Minister of State, Michael Wills has been presented to the electorate. The Foreward comprises 5 pages of stultifying, bureaucratese and contradictory waffle - on a par with just about everything this government does.

At 68 pages in length there is much to comment on, but to mention just a few points:

The Foreward, in the first paragraph, mentions right and freedoms, the need to know that people will behave responsibly towards each other and it adds that "We [the Government] believe it is important that..........every UK citizen should be able to have their say in how their country is run;.....". Odd statement for a government that has given away the right of every UK citizen in that area, namely our membership of the European Union. It discusses the responsibilities citizens have toward each other, yet strangely does not mention the responsibility citizens have to the country, whether or not that be by birth or adoption of the country through immigration.

This Green Paper continues, ad nauseam, about the responsibility towards each other yet, as stated above, mentions nothing about the responsibility towards the country, its culture and its traditions. Later in the document it quotes from the Australian Citizenship Act 2007 and it is a pity that Jack Straw does not put more emphasis on points 1 and 4 of his quote.

Under Criminal Justice it says that the responsibilities to report on criminal activities are integral to a justice system but the detail of that obligation has never been highlighted and that the Government believes it should be. This looks like the beginning of an 'informants network' if it ever came to pass.

It is extremely interesting that, whilst saying it is open to persuasion, it "does not propose the inclusion of the principle of habeas corpus or a right to trial by jury in any new Bill of Rights and Responsibilities." One has to ask if this is the precursor to the introduction of the Napoleonic code of justice under an EU directive/regulation?

This proposed Bill of Rights threatens to be one large document, more in keeping with the EU Treaty of Lisbon in respect of length and just as incomprehensible!

Paragraph xiii of the Foreward states ".........We believe historians will bracket this Government’s reforms with the constitutional transformations of the 17th and 19th centuries as times of profound and invigorating change, when power was redistributed. These last ten years have been years of progress." Mr. Straw, rest in no doubt that historians will bracket your Government's reforms as the most draconian, the most repressive ever. You have managed quite successfully to break the link between the governed and the governors! One final correction to this paragraph and that is to the last word, which should be 'regression'!

In conclusion the only advice that any sane person might give to Mr. Straw would be to file this Green Paper in the wastepaper bin - preferably a brown one!

Monday, 23 March 2009

At the request of the Party Leader, the annual UKIP South West Rally will become a National Spring Rally this year. It will also serve as a European Election Launch and be followed by the Annual Business Meeting.

The date is Saturday 18th April and the location is the Great Hall of Exeter University, Stocker Road, Exeter EX4 4PY. Parking should be plentiful and coaches can drop off directly at the front door.

The timetable will commence at 10.00 a.m. for refreshments and meeting old friends. The Rally will open at 11 a.m. prompt. The morning will be devoted to keynote speakers from around the country. We are now finalising this list which will be advertised under the link below. After a generous lunch break, the afternoon will be devoted to the June Elections. At approximately 4.45 p.m. the venue will be given over to the Annual Business Meeting, which will be chaired by Paul Nuttall.

UKIP SW Rallies date back to 2002 and the University always look after us extremely well. Catering facilities are diverse and the SW events have pioneered audio/visual effects, since used by the national party conferences.The South West Rallies normally attract 500 to 600 people but we hope that as a national event it will attract several hundred more this year. It is a superb recruiting occasion and non members are especially welcome.

To speed up registration on the day and establish numbers, tickets will be issued in advance against a donation. Unlike the national annual conference we are not laying down a minimum ticket price and will issue tickets against any size of donation but bear in mind that these events cost a lot of money to lay on. Those without pre-registered tickets can still attend but will be asked to register before entry.

However we do have to estimate the numbers for catering purposes and names for security. You can register by e-mail at the following site. Spring conference_CLICK HEREThere you will find a direct link to the Rally page to obtain your e-tickets and directions. Pay Pal facilities are available for donations.

In case of any difficulty ring us on the number shown below.Hotels are plentiful in Exeter at weekends, across a price range. Exeter St David's Railway Station is only a short taxi ride from the venue.

West Midlands UKIP MEP, Mike Nattrass, has launched a major campaign for designated smoking rooms to be reintroduced in public houses to boost the struggling pub industry.

The UKIP MEP said the introduction of the smoking ban in pubs on July 1 2007 has had a disastrous impact on the nation’s pub industry.

With thousands of pubs permanently calling time since the 2008 Budget and with further beer tax increases expected in April’s budget, Mr Nattrass today said the smoking ban, which followed the EU’s Council recommendation 2003/54 calling on all EU member states to “implement legislation providing suitable protection from the effects of passive smoking at working places“, has hit the pub trade hard.

Now, Mr Nattrass has urged members of the community and the pub industry itself to back his campaign for separate ventilated and un-staffed smoking rooms to take their rightful place back in the British local.

Mr Nattrass said: “My view is that smoking in pubs must involve a separate room which is ventilated where no staff are forced to work in the smoke. “It would mean that many customers would return to pubs which are focal points in local communities up and down the country. “The local pub is at the heart of communities and the introduction of the smoking ban has undermined the British pub,” he added. While UKIP does not like prohibitions and bans in general, UKIP does recognise that the smoking ban has been popular among certain groups, such as families and those wishing to eat out in pubs. However, UKIP believes that a more common sense solution is needed.

UKIP states the smoking ban should be amended to allow pub landlords - freehold, tenanted/leased and managed - and club managers to provide contained and ventilated 'smoking rooms' within pubs and clubs, where customers desire it.

Sunday, 22 March 2009

The European Parliament's president has condemned the Conservatives' decision to leave the centre-right EPP group.

Hans-Gert Poettering, a German member of the EPP, called Tory leader David Cameron's decision "a serious mistake".

"The big parties should belong to a European family of parties," he said, adding that the Tories' withdrawal was "not in the interests of the UK".

The European People's Party-European Democrats group (EPP) is the biggest bloc, with 278 MEPs.

The second largest is the Party of European Socialists (PES), with 216 MEPs.

The Conservatives informed the EPP earlier this month that they intend to leave it in May.

'Regret'

They plan to form an alternative bloc after the European elections on 4 June.

The Conservatives disagree with what they see as a federalist EPP agenda.

The bloc was opposed to the UK having a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty - something the Conservatives campaigned for - and it wants closer economic integration in Europe, as well as common immigration, defence and foreign policies.

European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso has expressed "regret" over the Tory move.

Speaking in Brussels, Mr Poettering said he was, however, glad about Prime Minister Gordon Brown's visit to the European Parliament next Tuesday.

He said it was "an expression that the UK feels the EU is important".

The Conservatives will need to find allies from at least six other countries to qualify as a new grouping and get access to EU funding.

It is thought they will try to attract MEPs from the Czech Republic and Poland among others.

MEP Graham Watson, leader of the liberal ALDE group, called Mr Cameron's move "isolationism that should have no place in British politics".

He also described it as "damaging for the UK and British business".

Mr Watson told BBC News he thought the EPP would still be the biggest bloc after the June election, despite the Tory withdrawal.

Earlier this week Mr Cameron said the new grouping would "work closely with the EPP on all sorts of areas where we agree", adding: "We will be happy neighbours rather than unhappy tenants."

Saturday, 21 March 2009

An elected representative constantly receives requests for donations to charities, many of which are not nearly as deserving as they seem. However, a few weeks ago, Nigel Farage UKIP leader received a touching message from a Mr David Kinsell, the trainer of Brighton-and-Hove's Hangleton Rangers (under 10's) Football Team.

Mr Kinsell wanted him to sponsor a "training strip" for his gallant lads, with the sponsor's name printed on the shirts, to the tune of £150.

As a supporter of worthwhile community projects, and a great believer in sport for young people, Nigel was happy to help. He despatched the money to Dave and thought he'd heard the last of the matter.

Imagine Nigels surprise when he learned that the newly-prepared kit was to be burned, that Mr Kinsell had been sacked, as trainer of Hangleton Rangers (under 10's) and that the young players' parents – some of them in tears – had been ringing Dave with messages of sympathy.

Apparently, the trainer's offence, in the eyes of the club committee, was that he had "accepted a political donation", even though the shirts were only training kit and only featured the name (no mention of UKIP).

One could not help suspecting some kind of political bias in the upper echelons of Hangleton Rangers, especially when it appeared that Dave was a particularly successful and popular trainer, and that a member of the club committee was also a Tory-member of Lewes District Council.

Having been bounced out of "the Rangers", having been offered positions as trainer with various other junior football clubs, and having become a veteran of radio, television and press interviews, Dave Kinsell says that he has "never had a week like it". He has also joined the Brighton branch of UKIP.

The club committee, meanwhile, has retreated behind a battery of legal artillery in the anxiety that someone might sue them. Who would have thought that kids' football could come to this?

Friday, 20 March 2009

London MEP Gerard Batten will be on BBC1's The Big Questions at 10am. Gerard Batten, who regularly features on the front of Dutch and other European newspapers for his work on pinning down the cost we all have to pay for the European Union is among the speakers on BBC1's topical debate program this week, coming from Enfield. He appears alongside presenter Nicky Campbell, broadcaster Gloria Hunniford and Sun columnist Kelvin McKenzie. So set your alarms early for Sunday morning to hear Gerard talking sound common sense!

Shrewsbury & Telford Hospital NHS Trust are currently consulting on changes to the services they provide at the two hospitals. Services are going to have to be cut back and there's even the possibility that both hospitals will have to be closed and replaced with a single hospital.

Along with the usual reason of never having enough money, the booklet they've produced lays the a large portion of the blame on the EU Working Time Directive and the fact that abolishing our opt-out is going to mean staff shortages and increased wage bills.

It's refreshing to see someone like an NHS Trust going off message and telling people that stupid EU regulations are to blame for bad things that are happening. But what would be really refreshing would be the NHS Trust and other public services such as the fire service who are suffering at the hands of EU regulations to begin actively campaigning against them.

The NHS has a duty to provide a public service and if the EU is stopping them from doing that then they have a duty to oppose it.

Tuesday, 17 March 2009

A youth football club in Brighton have sacked their coach and confiscated a training kit because it was sponsored by Nigel Farage.

Farage made a personal donation of £150 to the club to pay for a training kit for Hangleton Rangers and the coach had Farage's name put on the kit as the sponsor. But the committee, according to the club secretary Kevin Aughey, has decided that it's a political donation.

Brighton is, of course, in the same euroregion that Nigel Farage represents and the part of the country that provides the highest support for UKIP. In the last EU elections, UKIP took 19.2% of the vote and returned 4 MEPs. The Conservatives currently have 4 MEPs but early indications show that UKIP is on track to gain an even higher number of votes in the impending EU election than the last one and a lot of those will be at the expense of the Conservatives.

The Conservatives run Brighton & Hove City Council with a minority cabinet and the borough's 3 MPs are Labour. With 12 teams and 200 members the last thing the Conservatives will want is Farage's name on Hangleton Rangers' shirts.

According to Kevin Aughey, the donation from Farage is "political" and the shirts will be burned. Farage said:

This was a personal donation. I was glad to help. Being an MEP is being part of the local community and if I can help that community in some way then I always try to. Nobody from the club has had the courtesy to contact me to ask whether it was a personal donation or a political one. If they had then none of this would have happened. The real losers here are the kids themselves.

Monday, 16 March 2009

THE son of Kidderminster’s “singing dustman” has been selected as the UK independence Party’s next parliamentary hopeful for Wyre Forest.

Michael Wrench, 40, of Kidderminster, said he was “delighted” to be chosen and would be “working closely” with Tony Baker, branch chairman, on “a number of issues” that UKIP wanted to tackle, including the closure of Kidderminster Hospital’s A&E.

Mr Wrench, who served four years in the army and was posted in Germany with the Royal Signals, is the son of Eddie Wrench, who worked as a refuse collector for Wyre Forest District Council and was once featured on regional television after his unconventional singing act began attracting huge numbers of fans in district pubs.

He said: "My dad sang in many of the area’s pubs and was well liked by all. He was such a cheerful chap, he often featured in the local press because he was always happy and smiling."

Since leaving the army in 1994, Mr Wrench continued to work as a civilian in security for the army in Germany until 1998, when he moved into IT. Mr Wrench said: "Everyone thinks that just because I am in UKIP I am anti-European, which is not the case. I am anti the European Union, which is undermining our British democracy.

“I am out to prove that UKIP has developed into far more than a single issue party and will be campaigning on a number of issues." He added he was also concerned about how the global downturn will affect what remains of Kidderminster’s carpet industry and the jobs of its workers.

Sunday, 15 March 2009

Following Christopher Booker's article last weekend, we have a rebuttal in 'letters' this weekend from Zac Goldsmith - the 'Greenie' Tory - referring readers to the Conservative Party's document, The Low Carbon Economy, which he describes as "a detailed policy programme on energy" and which he urges all to read.

Very well Mr. Goldsmith, lets do that thing.

The Foreward, penned by David Cameron, states "We have a vision of a different Britain"; and "It is a vision of a Britain which leads the world in new green technologies"; and "Is this vision shared across the political spectrum? In one sense, I believe it is. Today, all the major political parties agree that this is what we must seek to achieve".

As the subject of energy is an EU competence - ie, a subject on which only the EU can dictate policy - the vision of which David Cameron speaks is not his vision, but that of our real government in Brussels and one which he is duty bound to follow without question. He is,of course, correct in that this 'vision' is "shared across the political spectrum" and that "all the major political parties agree that this is what we must seek to achieve" because all the main political parties wish to remain a member of the EU and are therefore beholden to the EU's energy policy!

So immediately we have the classic example of politicians lying to their electorate by (a) stating that the 'vision' is theirs - when it is not - and (b) that 'all the major political parties agree on this' by omitting the fact that they have no other option.

David Cameron ends his foreward with the words "This is a blueprint for a better energy future". Wrong Mr. Cameron, it is a policy driven by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats over whom you have no control, based on ideas which have no foundation and which will 'cost the earth' - in more than one sense - to implement.

In the executive summary the document states "Britain is now in the grip of a full-blown recession and Labour’s Debt Crisis has put our public finances in chaos, with the worst budget deficit in the developed world."; and "First, it will strengthen our economy. Decarbonising Britain will help create hundreds of thousands of jobs...."; and "the reckless accumulation of debt in our economy means higher taxes for the next generation".

With Britain 'in the grip of a full-blown recession' and 'our public financies in chaos', the Conservatives plan to spend even more money on something that is costly, cannot be delivered in the time scale planned and which will not provide the energy that the country requires, Decarbonising Britain surely will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, not for the 'average man in the street' but surely for those 'environmentalists' whose latest conference admitted that science was not the objective but that 'political pressure' was. Not only will 'the reckless accumulation of debt mean higher taxes for the next generation', so will this so-called policy that the Conservatives are forced to adopt by the EU.

On page 3 of the document it states "we can meet our target to reduce emissions by 80% over 1990 levels". Another lie here, in that the targets are not theirs - ie, the Conservative Party - but those of the EU. In respect of 'meeting our targets' - fact: the present government plans to build 25GW-worth of offshore turbines by 2020. There is not the remotest possibility that we could build the 10,000 giant turbines required, at the rate of two a day, when it takes weeks to install each vast machine. On top of which, of the giant barges needed for the work, there is but one in the world. (Christopher Booker - Sunday Telegraph 26./10/2008)

The document includes ideas such as "putting computing intelligence into electricity networks"; transform electricity networks with ‘smart grid’ and ‘smart meter’ technology so that the use of electricity for a wide range of household and workplace appliances, and the charging of electric and plug-in hybrid cars, can be tailored automatically to match the supply of electricity" (page 4); "vastly expand the amount of offshore wind.....power" (debunked above) (page 4); "electricity network operators to establish a new national recharging network" (page 5); "introduce a new entitlement for every home to be fitted immediately with up to £6,500 of approved energy efficiency improvements, the cost to be repaid through fuel bills over a period of up to 25 years" (page 6); "establish a new ‘top runner’ scheme to highlight the most energy-efficient household goods" (page 6): "fully implement the Energy Performance in Buildings Directive and require Display Energy Certificates for public and private non-domestic buildings over 1000 square metres" (page 6) (good heavens - actual mention of the EU Directive!) "immediately start work on establishing a new high speed rail network linking cities in the North and South" (page 6).

Page 7 of the document states "They buy us protection against the hazards of the future." What it does not say is that the hazards of the future are those imposed by our membership of the European Union and by God, were it possible to buy protection from that load of f'wits!

Under the heading of Social Justice (page 10) the document states "When families are being hit hard every time they pay their gas bill, fill up their cars or do the weekly shop, we can all see the advantage of moving to low carbon sources of energy and improving efficiency" - and who, Mr. Cameron, has been responsible for that? Not us consumers, that is for sure!

On page 10 of the document, the Conservative Party have the gall to quote "In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith (usually regarded as the apostle of the free market)" - but we haven't got a 'free market' Mr. Cameron because by your blind adherence to the principle of membership of the European Union it imposes regulations which are acknowledged go be counter-productive and thereby extremely costly!

Page 31 of this document discusses the question of low energy light bulbs and states "Until and unless a new generation of LED bulbs comes to replace the existing mercury-based bulbs, we will continue to face the need for a national collection and disposal network that will enable users to dispose safely of the existing low energy bulbs in accordance with the WEEE Directive" (God, another mention of an EU Directive!) And who brought in this stupid rule about low energy light bulbs? That's right Mr. Cameron, your masters in Brussels so, as it is a requirement that they be 'disposed of safely' you have no option but to set up yet another 'industry'!

I really cannot be bothered continuing to pick holes in what is, basically, a laughable proposal. When will any of the three main political parties, in one of their manifestos, actually say the truth - something like 'Look Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms Elector, because of our membership of the European Union, in respect of matter xxxxx this is what we have to comply with and here is how we think is the best way to adhere to Directive/Regulation xxxx'?

Just tell us the truth you b******s, that where the EU has 'competence' you are no longer able to formulate policies

Thursday, 12 March 2009

I really do have better things to do with my time than keep responding to the lies of the UK First Party's semi-literate representative but as he bravely disabled comments on his blog to make sure nobody can correct him at source, I'll have to do so here.

It's ironic that the mysterious Greg L-W should make such a big thing of using a username instead of my real name on blogs - presumably the name on his cheque book isn't Greg L-W. For the record, however, I am far better known on the interenet - especially in political circles - by my username rather than my real name. There is no secret as to who I am - a quick search of Google will turn up innumerable sources of information about me.

I am not, despite what the UKIP website says, the chairman of Telford & Wrekin UKIP and haven't been for a couple of years. While others, like Greg L-W, were actively trying to bring down the party they supposedly support, I did a stint as chairman when I was needed.

And despite saying this several times, Greg L-W's stunted intelect obviously needs several reminders before anything sinks in - Bloggers4UKIP has nothing to do with UKIP. It is not an "approved UKIP site". UKIP did, in fact, ask for something to be removed from the site once and I refused.

While there is a lot of my personal information about me on the internet (which dispels the myth that I am coy about my identity), putting my employment details on a blog is out of order and in breach of Blogger's terms of service. I specifically don't talk about my employer - especially as I work on a contract for a government department - but it's not hard to work out who it is I work for from other information. However, I am not an "IT Consultant" as Greg L-W says. His tone of writing implies that he knows all this secret inforrmation about me but he doesn't. It's all freely available information with a bit of guess work.

Putting my phone number on there - which, again, is freely available on the internet - and inviting people to make unsolicited calls to me is also in breach of Bloggers terms of service and if I did receive any abusive phone calls would mean Greg L-W had committed a criminal offence.

With cretins like this in the UK First Party, I really don't think UKIP or any other party has anything to worry about. The party is only a couple of weeks old and already their members are bringing it into disrepute!

Wednesday, 11 March 2009

Just before half term the Taunton Deane Chairman had a phone call from a 14 year old Taunton School pupil, Colin Cortbus. He explained that he was about to start his Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme (DofE) work, and that for one of the elements he would like to work for UKIP.

Colin met with the Committee, told them a little about himself and outlined the requirements of the DofE scheme. His idea was to work for UKIP for the 12 week period of the ‘service’ section, with particular emphasis on trying to stimulate greater interest in UKIP among young people in the constituency.

He is a lively speaker, well-informed, well-read and politically aware, and so impressed the committee that they decided unanimously to co-opt Colin as the Taunton Deane UKIP constituency’s Youth Ambassador for the 12 week period of his DofE award work.

One hour a week does not seem much time to attack such an ambitious aim, but Colin has already spent an hour in the wind an rain distributing UKIP material in Taunton's High Street, and has come up with an idea for a leaflet.

Good Luck Colin !, This again shows that Young Independence, the youth wing for the party, is recruiting more and more bright, intelligent young people. Young people who understand and are attracted by UKIP's global outlook compared to the outdated, backwards thinking of European federalism.

Tuesday, 10 March 2009

Libertas launches in the UK this morning and it's going to be interesting to find out whether people understand the basic point about Declan Ganley. He's not against the European Union, far from it. He's very much a supporter of the project, just wishing to change very slightly the direction it's going in, that's all.

There's a rather bewildering assumption that because Declan campaigned so successfully for a No vote in the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty that he's therefore against further integration, ever closer union and the rest of the federalist claptrap. We in UKIP stood alongside him in that campaign and thoroughly admire what he achieved. However, we're also very much aware that he's in favour of much of what makes up the European Project. It's really just the Lisbon Treaty he doesn't like.

Ganley starts from the same place that I do (and therefore his analysis, at this point, is obviously correct). The European Union is responsible for some 75 per cent of our laws, the aim of the grand project is to move power away from the people and place it firmly in the hands of a technocratic class of bureaucrats and there's very little or no democracy in the way that it functions. We both agree further that something about this needs to change. However, what it is that should change is where we diverge and this is where Declan and Libertas fall into error. Essentially, the same error the Conservative party has itself fallen prey to.

They both believe that, while the current situation is dire, matters can and will be improved by working from the inside, by attempting to change the direction of the juggernaut. Libertas is running on the idea that a few more elections, say an elected European Union president, will solve matters, that the voice of the people will be heard. The Tories seem to think that, well, it's difficult to know what the Tories actually intend to do about anything or, indeed, whether they would do anything if they themselves could make up their minds. We're still waiting for them to leave the EPP, something Cameron promised would happen in months, not years or weeks - that promise being what swung his election to the party leadership.

But however well-meaning this all is, however nice it would be to be able to believe that any of us could change the direction we're being moved in, this simply isn't possible. We're not being offered any choices on how the EU is going to work in the future, how it is going to develop. There are no opportunities to force or insist upon our own blueprints either. The parliament does not have the power to initiate legislation: that stays very firmly with the Commission. We are faced with only two choices. We accept the way the EU is, the way that decisions are made and the drive to creating a federal superstate. Or we reject that vision and decide to leave.

You'll recall that they didn't listen to the French or the Dutch in the referendums on the constitution. Also that they're not listening to the Irish on their referendum on the renamed and repacked constitution (now called the Lisbon treaty). They won't listen to calls for reform, for changes in direction, from inside the parliament either. The basic policy idea of both Libertas and the Tory party is flawed: they are arguing for negotiations with people who will not negotiate.

This is how we get to my and our position in UKIP. These changes that people desire are simply not possible while we remain within the Union. We have to leave and to cooperate where we wish and need to but for the rest of it simply become an independent and sovereign nation once again.

The battle to save the traditional British pub is today (11.3.09) being stepped up by the UK Independence Party (UKIP). Already well known for speaking out against the slow extinction of the British pub, through a combination of the over taxing of beer and over zealous health and safety legislation, UKIP is using National No Smoking Day to start a ‘Save the Pub’ a petition, with its own website www.savethepub.co.uk which also features a major policy document ‘Pubs and Smoking’ that contains far reaching proposals aimed at keeping British pubs open.

David Campbell Bannerman, the Party’s Deputy Leader and Eastern Counties Lead Candidate in the forthcoming European Election as well as its policy director said: “There is nothing more traditionally British than the local pub but we are losing them at a rate of around 40 a week and they may be wiped out unless there is a major effort to save them. UKIP has a whole range of ideas for turning this situation around. Among other things, we would cut the duty on draught beers, real ale, cider and some lagers. We would introduce a Royal Commission to investigate beer pricing to sort out the current problems with wholesale prices which strongly disadvantage pubs.

“We would also cut business rates on community pubs and remove local authorities from the licensing process. Community pubs play a role in social cohesion through providing a comfortable environment for people to meet and talk. They are also a controlled drinking environment which offers a bulwark against the binge drinking problem.

“In regard to the smoking ban, we fully recognise its popularity in many parts of the community but UKIP would take a more flexible approach toward its enforcement in pubs, which would be allowed to have separate, contained and well ventilated smoking rooms as well as outside smoking areas using patio heaters. The EU ban on patio heaters is absurd as their impact on the environment is negligible and certainly not worth the loss of an important local amenity”.

To read the full UKIP policy: ‘Pubs and Smoking’ and to sign the Save the Pub petition, go to www.savethepub.co.uk UKIP will also be delivering special 'Save the Pub' beer mats to pubs all over the Eastern counties.

This is my last column for the East Anglian Daily Times as the European Election beckons and I am not seeking re-election. After ten years in the European Parliament, my second career, having already retired once, I have decided that it is time to stand aside and let younger candidates come through.

Writing these columns has been one of the great pleasures of my time as an MEP. The EADT is to be congratulated for being one of the very few newspapers prepared to carry regular material from the region’s MEPs. Instrumental in that has been the paper’s Political Editor, Graham Dines, who has always been very fair and even-handed in his treatment of UKIP, for which I am very grateful. My thanks also to the readers of the EADT, who I hope will have appreciated the independent views I have expressed.

What I have tried to do in my columns is to bring some realism to the debate about Britain ’s membership of the European Union. I have tried to blow holes in some of the empty, rose tinted rhetoric of those who see EU membership as some sort of sunlit upland that provides peace, security and secures our economic future. It provides none of these things but is quite happy to claim the credit for them, credit which belongs elsewhere to organisations like NATO.

In regard to economics, events are now rapidly catching up with a eurozone that has been built upon quicksand. No one cared very much about adhering to EMU entry requirements. Rules about national debts tended to be overlooked or excuses made in the rush to get countries signed up. Well the pigeons are coming home to roost right now. Consumer and business confidence in the zone have fallen to an all time low and many EU countries are on the brink of disaster, including, alas, Ireland , which is in a real mess.

These are tough times for us all but at least Britain , independent of the euro and in control of its own interest rate, is in a better position to ride out the storm. We have been able to cut our rate to try to stimulate our economy, whilst the eurozone countries have to sit and wait for the European Central Bank to decide what to do and hope that it will help their economy rather than that of their neighbour. They are trapped in the euro straitjacket and cannot act in their own best interests. Surely it is the first duty of any government, to act in the best interests of the people it represents? Is it not the case that in signing up to the euro, they have abdicated their most important duty?

A recent report produced by the Bruges Group puts the annual cost of EU membership at £4.64 billion per month, £1.07 billion per week, £152.8 million a day, £6.36 million per hour and an astonishing £106,117 per minute (net figures). EU membership was always grossly expensive but in the boom times, the cost could be overlooked or avoided, by its supporters. It cannot be overlooked any longer. With people losing their jobs and their homes, the expense and the huge regulatory burden it generates are no longer sustainable. We have to leave and soon.

Readers interested in more information about Jeffrey Titford MEP or UKIP can find it on www.jeffreytitfordmep.co.uk

Monday, 9 March 2009

There are more than enough turncoats running around claiming to be concerned UKIP members slagging off the party, its leadership and generally causing as much trouble and disruption as they can get away with. It's about time they found a channel for their obsessive, compulsive behaviour.

Perhaps now their insane and obsessive attacks on UKIP will be in the name of the UK First Party or, even better, perhaps they'll turn on their new party instead and let the grown ups get on with it.

And for the record - although it has been said more than once - this blog is nothing to do with UKIP and they have no control or influence over it.

Sunday, 8 March 2009

No, this isn't the new UK Fuel logo for a new type of eco-friendly power station, it's the logo of the United Kingdom First Party.

The motto of the UK First Party is "Country before self" - a rallying call for fascists everywhere, very Musollini-esque.

Fascism is a radical, authoritarian nationalist ideology that aims to create a single-party state with a government led by a dictator who seeks national unity and development by requiring individuals to subordinate self-interest to the collective interest of the nation or race.

Now, it's important not to confuse the UK First Party with the British First Party, which is a different British fascist party, or the England First Party which appears to have borrowed half of its manifesto from Mein Kampf.

The UK First Party was co-founded by Peter Cole, the now ex-chairman of the UKIP Fenland branch which he dissolved when he set up his new party. Peter Cole has been in open revolt against Nigel Farage and the NEC for some time now.

The UK First Party blog gives an insight into what we can expect from them in the future. They are making much of the fact that Peter Cole is Tom Wise MEP's secretary and the fact that both Tom Wise and Ashley Mote might not think they're complete fruitcakes. According to the blog, Wise and Mote are both UKIP MEPs. They may have been elected as UKIP MEPs but they were both expelled from the party - Mote because he was charged with fraud and is currently on police bail and Wise because he was accused of fraud by the EU (over his secretarial expenses, incidently).

So while they are telling readers that they have the secretary of a UKIP MEP in their party and two UKIP MEPs that might support them, the truth is that two independent MEPs - one of which is a convicted fraudster - haven't laughed at them and the secretary of one of those independent MEPs is a founder of their party. Not exactly the coup they make it out to be!

The official leader of the UK First Party is Rebecca Faye Hilman and its treasurer is Tamsin Ruth Bowden and the registered address - 18 Falconers Mews in Swindon - is someone's house on a new housing development. The UK First Party doesn't have any registered emblems and bizarrely, they've declared themselves not to be a small party. Where they're going to find 10 grand to field a candidate in an EU election is anyone's guess.

The UK First Party has been compared to Veritas, perhaps a little unkindly. Veritas is, after all, still limping along in relative obscurity 4 years after Robert Kiljoy-Slick started it all off.

It would appear that on March 16th another political party is to be launched. In an article by its founder, highlighting the deficit in our democratic system, he states:

"Everybody knows that the system is broken, everyone agrees that reform is required. However turkeys do not vote for Christmas. It seems that if we want to change the system we have to change the turkeys."

Interestingly the only comment to the article - at the time of writing this blog - perfectly encapsulates the reason why the LibDems earned the nickname 'LibDums!

Unfortunately the central idea proposed by Sir Paul Judge is flawed in that it would, in effect, create a 'rudderless ship of state'.

All three main political parties pontificate about 'bringing decision making down to the lowest level', yet seem to do precisely the opposite. At least the UK Independence Party does have a policy that would do just that and which can be read here.

If the electorate really are disenchanted with the present political parties then they do have an opportunity to 'change the turkeys'

Saturday, 7 March 2009

British MEP and leader of the Liberal group in the European Parliament Graham Watson has warned that Ireland may have to leave the EU if it votes No for a second time in a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. The Irish Times quotes him saying, “It is very difficult to see any country being able to stay in if they have had two Nos from the people”. He also warned that, “It would be very difficult to get large companies to invest in a country that looked as if it might be leaving the EU. I think it would have a social impact as well and, of course, it would call into question the future of the EU agency that is based in Ireland”.

He goes on to say that the European Liberal Democrats (ELDR) would contribute money to the second Lisbon referendum campaign if Irish PM Brian Cowen’s party Fianna Fail asked for financial help. Fianna Fail last week announced it would join the ELDR before European elections in June.

Meanwhile, On BBC Online, as part of a series of viewpoints on EU issues, Open Europe’s Lorraine Mullally argues that the EU Lisbon Treaty “is bad news for Europe”. She notes that, “It is a myth that the EU Lisbon Treaty will strengthen democracy in Europe”, quoting the President of the German Constitutional Court, who has said the Treaty's provisions for national parliaments are “ineffective” and “impractical”, and the cross-party House of Commons EU Scrutiny Committee, which said: “We doubt the significance of the 'greater opportunities' for national parliaments to be involved in any meaningful manner in the workings of the EU”. She also notes that judges at the German Constitutional Court have recently pointed out that the Treaty involves a clear extension of the EU's competences, with one asking “whether it would not be more honest to just proclaim a European federal state”.

Thursday, 5 March 2009

Tucked away in prime ministers' questions yesterday (held by Harperson deputising) was a question from the redoubtable Ann Winterton . She asked for confirmation that:

… the real reason for part-privatising Royal Mail stems directly from European Union postal legislation, which forced Royal Mail to divest itself of its most profitable business, thereby handing it over lock, stock and barrel to European competitors.

According to Ann, there was a sudden hush in the House - an embarrassed silence – almost as if someone had done something unmentionable in church. Then Harperson, dutifully briefed by her gifted civil servants, delivered her "non-answer". The "real reason", she said, was "the analysis in the Hooper report, which we commissioned as long ago as December 2007."

Now, this is an interesting response, as the Hooper Report tells us that the real reason for part-privatising Royal Mail is ... er ... European Union postal legislation, and also EU state aid rules.

Basically, says Hooper, Royal Mail needs to modernise, which requires considerable investment. But "that transformation would have to be carried out under European rules on restructuring aid." That in turn would "impose considerable restraints" and thus take time. But, unless Royal Mail can modernise faster than EU rules would allow, "a forced restructuring under European rules is highly likely."

That, concludes Hooper, "would be a costly and poor outcome for the taxpayer, for consumers, for Royal Mail and its employees." By contrast, he adds, "private capital is generally more flexible and more tolerant of necessary risk. It can be raised more easily, faster and for a wider range of purposes and does not come at the cost of competing public priorities."

Thus does Hooper recommend that "there should be a strategic partnership between Royal Mail and one or more private sector partners." And, while the precise nature of such a partnership is a matter for the Government to negotiate, at its core, "will be Royal Mail's obligations under the universal service, as required under EU and UK law." The UK law, incidentally, largely transposes EU law.

Why Royal Mail cannot fund its modernisation programme from its own resources is explained by Booker in his column . Here, the problem is Britain's keenness to comply with three EU postal services directives, designed to end national postal monopolies by 2010 and to promote "cross-border" integration of the EU's postal services.

Because of these, Royal Mail had to surrender the most profitable part of its operations, when bulk business mailing was opened up to rival firms. It still has to deliver business mail, for a knock-down price of 14p an item, while the 19 companies that bid successfully for the business of collecting and sorting them cream off all the profits. This was a major factor turning Royal Mail's profits into a £179 million annual loss, which means it has no money for its modernisation programme.

As to why other European postal services have not been similarly affected, Hooper himself notes that "the UK has been amongst the first countries in Europe to open the postal sector to competition." In other words, this is exactly the situation described by Booker.

So why was there such a deathly hush in the House? Well … the Conservatives are supporting the Government, against the Labour back benches, to get the legislation passed.

The last thing the Tories want is for it to be known that the privatisation programme is entirely driven by the EU, thus putting the party in a position of supporting EU rules. This, with the euro-elections coming up, would not conform with their new-found (and temporary) image as a eurosceptic party.

Thus we had the hush of anticipation, bolstered by a frisson of fear, in case Harperson gave the game away. When she did not – and, of course, she was not going to – there was a collective sigh of relief. Business continued as usual – in Europe and ruled by Europe … but this must never be admitted.

Wednesday, 4 March 2009

Whilst searching on another subject I have come across this from the Communities and Local Government website.

Laying the regulations, Local Government Minister John Healey said:

"Councillors' utmost concern should be to provide the best possible governance for local people, and in the run up to unitary transition this is more important than ever. These regulations will ensure that despite the change in local governance incumbent councillors will remain accountable for their actions and face the full consequences of inappropriate behaviour. Just because they will no longer represent their electorate, doesn't mean that they will be let of the hook if residents raise allegations about their past conduct once their post ends.''

On the basis that 'what is good for the goose' etc - does this principle also apply to Labour MPs and the Labour Government regarding 'let off the hook' in respect of their past conduct (Ratifying the Lisbon Treaty)?

ConHome are trailing a speech by Dominic Grieve, shadow Justice secretary, which calls for fresh thinking on multiculturalism and in which he condemns decades of political correctness.

It can be argued that politicians today speak at great length on various matters, not necessarily to any effect and possibly purely because they like the sound of their own voices. This latest 'offering' does nothing more than highlight what is wrong yet, in the extracts given , does nothing to provide solutions.

The last quoted extract on the ConHome website is an example of 'hot air' and brings Dominic Grieve and his party no credit.

"The lack of a credible response from the mainstream right to the current issues of multiculturalism has now left a gap, which is being filled by extremist voices. UKIP and the British National Party have taken advantage to suggest policies not based on a reasoned morality but which play on fear and encourage hatred."Firstly to 'lump together' UKIP and BNP is akin to stating there is no difference between chalk and chesse and shows Dominic Greive's total lack of understanding about those two parties. Secondly, with regard to UKIP, to suggest that they are 'suggesting policies not based on reasoned morality but which play on fear and encourage hatred' again shows he has not studied the policies UKIP are advocating. Thirdly, whose fault is it, if not that of the Conservative Party - who are after all supposed to be Her Majesty's Official Opposition but who have, on recent evidence, been prepared to have the title but not actually to do much opposing - that there has not been a 'credible response' to the problems we have with multiculturism.

It is, to say the least, a tad rich for Dominic Grieve to opine that UKIP are 'playing on fear and encouraging hatred' when those policies are but addressing a problem that hundreds, if not thousands or hundreds of thousands, are saying and thinking. Politicians of the three main parties appear to have overlooked one basic fact and that is by allowing the introduction of an alien element, or elements, into a country profoundly affects that country's social structure.

Whilst immigration can and surely does improve a country, there is another factor which again has been overlooked by politicians of the past (with one notable exception, namely the late, great Enoch Powell) and that is the danger that has come to pass in that immigrants have, through the creed of diversity, been elevated into a privileged or special class.

To quote Enoch Powell in his infamous speech of April 1968 otherwise dubbed the 'Rivers of Blood':

"There could be no grosser misconception of the realities than is entertained by those who vociferously demand legislation as they call it 'against discrimination'......The discrimination and the deprivation, the sense of alarm and of resentment, lies not with the imigrant population but with those among whom they have come and are still coming.".

The efforts of those trying to 'order society' is akin to throwing a match on gunpowder. To quote Enoch Powell once again:

"The kindest thing that can be said about those who propose and support it is that they know not what they do........ But while to the immigrant, entry to this country was admission to privileges and opportunities eagerly sought, the impact upon the existing population was very different. For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, they find themselves made strangers in their own country."

Another delusion to which those who are wilfully, or otherwise, blind to realities can be summed up in the word 'integration'. To be integrated into a population means to become, for all practical purposes, indistinguishable from its other members. Whilst the majority may with to 'integrate', it is ridiculous to ignore the fact that there are those 'hotheads', religious zealots and/or 'activists' whose only intention is to impose their way of life on the host nation. In February 17th 1968 there appeared in the local press a statement by John Stonehouse, a Labour Member of Parliament and a member of the then government, who said (and whilst one ethnic group is mentioned, it does apply to all immigrants, whatever their ethnic origin):

"The Sikh communities' campaign to maintain customs inappropriate in Britain is much to be regretted. Working in Britain, particularly in the public services, they should be prepared to accept the terms and conditions of their employment. To claim special communal rights (or should that be 'rites') leads to a dangerous fragmentation within society. This communalism is a canker; whether practised by one colour or another it is to be strongly condemned."

In conclusion, 'waffle' such as that exhibited by Dominic Grieve serves no purpose. It is time for some plain speaking that spells out exactly what the problem is. One extremely basic point exists, one which I have covered previously, and that is the simple fact then when going to another country - whether that is to visit or live - one respects that country's laws, society and way of life. Until politicians accept that basic point they will, unfortunately, continue to spout 'waffle' and 'hot air'.

Of course, on the subject of immigration as in so many other matters, the ability of any of the three main parties to legislate and govern is constrained by their continued acceptance of membership of the European Union.